SkinsJock wrote:I think that right now anyone with any knowledge of the game can see that our QB situation is very clear - we have to hope that Campbell shows he is at least capable (and maybe better) as our "starting QB" but he is the only one of the 3 that has the ability to be our starter - he needs to step it up but he is "the guy" for right now.
I also feel that we are very lucky to have a quality back-up like Collins but, really people, Colt Brennan could be a very good QB but that is going to take some time and if everything goes well for him he might even be ready to play effectively in the NFL in a year or more. Lets support him and encourage him all we can, but, to have him on the field as our starter this year or next, means an awful lot of bad things for this team.
Really? Anyone not agreeing with you obviously doesn't know much about the game? What arrogance.
Let me tell you something.....every single year, a large group of so called experts (those that actually work in the NFL for NFL teams) show that they don't always have a very firm grasp of the game.
Even men who are considered great football men.....let's take Cowher, the hot commodity retired coach. He drafted Roethlisberger, and the plan was set in stone that Ben would sit for 2 years. Then Maddox got hurt, and then Batch, and they were forced to play Roethlisberger the rookie. They didn't choose to play him, they were forced to. And look what happened. Offensive rookie of the year. So how smart are the experts?
Same thing happened to us last year. Collins wasn't a choice, they were forced to play him. And look what happened? In retrospect, it was obvious that Collins was better suited to start (unless you aren't concerned with winning, and are totally committed to make a failing "franchise player" a success at any and all costs).
This pre-season....go look at the stats.....all of the stats for the QBs. Collins stats are better, and Brennan's are way better than Campbell. OK so they were against "scrubs". He was also playing with "scrubs"....if you'd choose to call Mason and BMC scrubs. Those scrubs led the NFL in rushing and receiving during pre-season and were cut, while we kept a couple of picks that look terrible. But the experts know best.
But go ahead and compare Collins stats to Campbell, and explain to me HOW Collins looked terrible, and JC is the clear starter? The numbers don't say that. The numbers say Campbell is #3.
Collins completion % 70.2 to JC 59% 260 yards to 206. Int % better, less sacks, better yards per completion, and a QB rating of 81.9 to Campbell's 70.7.
So if Collins looked terrible, how did Campbell look? You wouldn't know, because you can't see through those rose colored glasses you wear when Campbell is on the field.
I hear some of the "experts" on TV talking about how well suited Campbell is for Zorn's WC offense. What a load of nonsense. Campbell's biggest liability is his slow decision making and slow release (been that way from day one and hasn't improved much if any). So how is that well suited for an offense that requires the QB to make quick reads of the defensive alignments at the line to set blocking assignments, and then quick reads after the snap? He has twice the responsibility he had under Saunders offense, and he struggled with that between 2006 and 2007?
I'd say you don't have to be a football expert to understand this basic logic.
This undying infatuation with Jason Campbell is bordering on mass psychosis.
Campbell looked so bad against Carolina that they had him run 3 series against Jacksonville in order to find something resembling rhythm. And after those three series they gave up, and pulled him out. I guess they figure that to continue would have been risky....not injury wise, but mentally risky.
Yet it is oh so clear that Campbell MUST BE the starter, and anyone who thinks differently just doesn't know much about football.
What a crock.
To say that it is